1806, presented through a communication dated March 12, 1974,
denounces the arbitrary arrest of a Bolivian student in Cochabamba and the
illegal search and seizure of his personal effects and documents. Latter the
student was allegedly transferred to the La Paz prison.

The Commission, in a note of April 8,1974, requested that the Government of
Bolivia provide the pertinent information, in accordance with the provisions of
Articles 42 and 44 of its Regulations.

The Commission considered the status of this case at its thirty-fourth
session (October 1974) and in view of the fact that the Government of Bolivia
had not replied to the request for information, it decided to repeat its
request through a cable of October 24, 1974, and inform the claimant of this
decision.

Pursuant to this decision, a note was sent to the Government of Bolivia on
October 24, 1974, and a letter was sent to the claimant on October 31, 1974.

The Government of Bolivia acknowledged receipt of the cable of October 24
through a note dated November 11, 1974. In note of November 13 (No.
DGAJ-255/154), provided the following information:

"In response to your cable, unnumbered, dated October 25, 1974, I have
the honor to call to your attention official letter S.I.E. No. 1243/74, dated
October 31, 1974, which the head of the S.I.E., Major FAB Emilio Arabe Claure,
sent to the Chancellery;

MINISTRY OF THE INTERIOR-------- S.I.E.
No.1243/74. La Paz, October 31, 1974.--------Addressed to Mr. Marcelo Ostria
Trigo.-------- DEPUTY SECRETARY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS. City.- Dr. Ostria Trigo: I
am replying to your note DGAJ 243/255, in which you make reference to the
arrest of J. RAMIRO GARABITO SAAVEDRA, a student, who was brought before the
Common Court on January 2 of this year, and later released on May 15.-
Respectfully. Fdo. My. F.A.B. Emilio Arabe Claure.------CHIEF OF THE SIE."

For his part, the claimant, in a communication dated November 7, 1974,
informed the Commission with regard to settlement of the case of his son,
thanking it for the measures it had taken.

At the thirty-fifth session (May 1975) the Commission noted the above cited
communication, as well as the status of the case; in view of the fact that the
case had reached a favorable settlement based on a recognition of the human
right allegedly violated, it decided to file the case without further
processing.